Subject Matter Jurisdiction Flashcards
Subject matter jurisdiction is the power over what?
The case
What are the two main types of suits that federal courts can hear?
Diversity of citizenship and Federal question
What are the two requirements of Diversity of Citizenship cases?
- The case is either (a) between “citizens of different states” (diversity) or
(b) between “a citizen of a state and a citizen of a foreign country”
(alienage) and
The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
What two place does the term states include?
DC and Puerto Rico
What is the complete diversity rule?
No diversity if any P is a citizen of the same state as any D.
How citizenship of a US citizen determined?
By the state of her domicile.
Domicile is established by what two factors?
(1) Presence in state AND (2) intent to make it her permanent home (e.g., paying in-state tuition, registering to vote).
Can a person have more than one domicile at a time?
No. A person is only a citizen of one state.
At what point do we test for diversity?
we test for diversity when the case is filed.
P (CA) sues D (AZ). After filing, D becomes a citizen of CA. Does that mean
diversity is destroyed now that it’s California versus California? Why?
No, we test for diversity when the case is filed.
P (CA) wants to sue D (CA) in federal court. P moves to Utah and sues under diversity jurisdiction? is this ok?
It’s OK if P changed her domicile. Here we know she moved to Utah, but we do not know if she has made Utah her domicile.
P (CA) wants to sue D (CA) in federal court. P moves to Utah and sues under diversity jurisdiction? What else needs to be known?
We do not know her intent. Takes 2 things to change a domicile. need to move and the intent to make it her home.
How do you determine the citizenship of a corporation?
citizenship equals: (1) state where incorporated AND (2) the one state where the corporation has its principal place of business (PPB).
XYZ Corp. (inc. in AZ with PPB in CA) sues D (CA). Is there diversity?
No, P and D are CA citizens.
What is the corporation’s principal place of business? What do we call this?
It’s where managers direct, control, and coordinate corporate activity. We call this the nerve center, usually the its headquarters.
How do you determine the citizenship of an Unincorporated association (like partnership, LLC).?
Use the citizenship of all members (that includes general and limited partners)
Partnership has partners who are citizens of CA, AZ, UT, and NV. What is Partnership’s citizenship?
CA, AZ, UT, and NV. If unincorporated it is citizenship of all of the partners.
How do you determine the citizenship of Decedents, minors, or incompetents?
Use their citizenship, not the citizenship
of their representative.
Executor (CA), on behalf of the estate of Elvis (TN), sues D (CA). Is that OK? Why or why not?
Yes, because the P here is TN, look to the decedent, ignore the executor.
What is the minimum that a plaintiff must sue for in good faith to get to federal court?
$75,000.01
P sues for exactly $75,000. OK?
No, it must exceed 75,000
Whatever the plaintiff claims in good faith is OK unless what?
It is clear to a legal certainty that she cannot recover more than $75,000.
Suppose P sues for more than $75,000 but ultimately recovers less than $75,000. Is jurisdiction OK?
Yes. What P wins is irrelevant to jurisdiction.
What is the penalty in the plaintiff wins less than $75,000?
A Plaintiff who wins less than $75,000 may have to pay D’s litigation costs which do not include attorney’s fees.
What is Aggregation?
adding two or more claims to meet the amount requirement
P sues D for $40,000 breach of contract and for $50,000 for a totally unrelated
claim. What is the amount? Why?
The amount is $90,000.
We aggregate claims of one plaintiff v. one defendant.
Plaintiff #1 sues D for $50,000. In the same case, Plaintiff #2 sues D for
$40,000. OK? Why?
No. You cannot aggregate these two claims because the case is not by a single P against a single D.
P sues joint tortfeasors X, Y and Z for $75,000.01. OK? Why?
Yes, for joint claims, use the value of the claim. The number of parties is irrelevant because it is a joint claim.
What are the two tests for equitable (injunctive) relief to satisfy the minimum amount requirement. Which tests do you apply?
Plaintiff’s viewpoint test: does the thing that plaintiff is suing to enjoin decrease the value of plaintiff’s property by more than $75,000?
Defendant’s viewpoint test: would it cost defendant more than $75,000 to comply with the injunction?
Apply them both. If either is met most courts will allow suit to meet the minimum requirement rule.
What actions are barred from federal courts?
Federal courts will not hear actions involving issuance of divorce, alimony or child custody decree or to probate an estate.
What does a federal question case need to show to go to federal court?
Complaint must show a right or interest founded substantially on a federal law (e.g., federal constitution, legislation) and that the claim “arises under” federal law.
Is citizenship of the parties relevant in federal question cases?
No
Is the amount in controversy relevant in federal question cases?
No
What is the well pleaded complaint rule?
It is not enough that some federal issue is raised by the complaint. The P’s claim itself must “arise under” federal law.
What do you look at when you are assessing the well pleaded complaint rule? What do you ignore?
we look at the claim and ignore other material P might have alleged.
What do you ask when assessing the well pleaded complaint rule?
Is P enforcing a federal right?
Sharon Stone hires David Epstein to build a house. Epstein then fails to build, but argues that a federal environmental statute prohibits building where Sharon wants to build. Sharon sues Epstein for specific performance, and alleges that the federal statute does not apply. Is there a federal question, why or why not?
there is no FQ jurisdiction because Sharon is not enforcing a federal right.
What happens after a claim get to federal court under either diversity or FQ and there are additional claims in that case, what do you need to do?
For every single claim, test whether it invokes diversity or FQ. If so, it can come into the case.
What if the additional claim does not get in using diversity or FQ?
Use supplemental jurisdiction
Can Supplemental Jurisdiction be used to get a case into federal court? Why or why not?
No, Supplemental jurisdiction only works after a case is already in federal court (through diversity or FQ).
What is the test for Supplemental Jurisdiction?
The claim we want to get into federal court must share a “common nucleus of operative fact” with the claim that invoked federal subject matter jurisdiction.
In what additional claims is the supplemental jurisdiction test always met?
This test is always met by claims that arise from the same transaction or occurrence (T/O) as the underlying claim.
What is the limitation for “the test” for supplemental jurisdiction?
In a diversity case, the plaintiff cannot use supplemental jurisdiction to overcome a lack of diversity.
P (Utah) sues D-1 (CA) and D-2 (Utah) on state-law claims in one case. The claims arise from the same transaction. The claims exceed $75,000. The claim by P against D-1 meets diversity of citizenship jurisdiction. The claim by P against D-2 does not. Can the claim by P against D-2 invoke supplemental jurisdiction? Is it OK? Why?
No, because P can never overcome a lack of diversity in a diversity case.
Can supplemental jurisdiction be used to overcome a lack of diversity for a claim in an FQ case?
Yes, P can use supplemental jurisdiction to overcome a lack of diversity for a
claim in a FQ case.
P (CA) sues D (CA) for (1) violation of federal antitrust laws, and joins a transactionally related claim for (2) violation of state antitrust laws. OK?
Claim (1) is OK because it’s a FQ. But claim (2) is not FQ (because it’s based on state law) and does not meet diversity.
P (CA) sues D (CA) for (1) violation of federal antitrust laws, and joins a transactionally related claim for (2) violation of state antitrust laws. Can claim (2) invoke supplemental jurisdiction? Why or why not?
Yes YES. It meets “the test” and the limitation does not apply.
THE LIMITATION NEVER APPLIES IN FEDERAL QUESTION CASES
Can P use supplemental jurisdiction to overcome a lack of amount in controversy for an additional claim in a diversity case?
Yes. (i.e., suing D1 for $100,000 and exercising supplemental jurisdiction for a claim against D2 arising out of the same transaction or occurrence for $25,000)
P-1 (CA) and P-2 (CA) sue D (AZ) on state-law claims. P-1’s claim is for $100,000. P-2’s claim arises from the same transaction, and is for $50,000.
Can the claim by P-2 invoke supplemental jurisdiction? Why or why not?
Yes. This claim meets the test and the limitation does not apply to problems with amount in controversy. Limitation applies to lack of diversity not lack of amount.
a non-federal, non-diversity claim can be heard in federal court if it meets “the test” UNLESS it is what?
a. Asserted by a plaintiff
b. In a diversity of citizenship (not FQ) case AND
c. Is against a citizen of same state as the plaintiff.
What three supplemental claims do the courts have discretion to not hear?
(1) the federal question is dismissed early in the proceedings; or (2) the state law claim is complex, or (3) state law issues would predominate
